Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Understanding Covid-19 misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in context: Findings from a qualitative study involving citizens in Bradford, UK

View ORCID ProfileBridget Lockyer, View ORCID ProfileShahid Islam, Aamnah Rahman, View ORCID ProfileJosie Dickerson, View ORCID ProfileKate Pickett, View ORCID ProfileTrevor Sheldon, View ORCID ProfileJohn Wright, View ORCID ProfileRosemary McEachan, View ORCID ProfileLaura Sheard
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.22.20248259
Bridget Lockyer
1Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Bridget Lockyer
  • For correspondence: bridget.lockyer@bthft.nhs.uk
Shahid Islam
1Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Shahid Islam
Aamnah Rahman
1Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Josie Dickerson
1Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Josie Dickerson
Kate Pickett
2Department of Health Sciences, University of York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kate Pickett
Trevor Sheldon
3Institute of Population Health Sciences, Queen Mary University London
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Trevor Sheldon
John Wright
1Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for John Wright
Rosemary McEachan
1Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Rosemary McEachan
Laura Sheard
2Department of Health Sciences, University of York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Laura Sheard
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Background Covid-19 vaccines can offer a route out of the pandemic, yet initial research suggests that many are unwilling to be vaccinated. A rise in the spread of misinformation is thought to have played a significant role in this vaccine hesitancy. In order to maximise vaccine uptake it is important to understand why misinformation has been able to take hold at this time and why it may pose a more significant problem within certain populations and places.

Objective To understand people’s Covid-19 beliefs, their interactions with health (mis)information during Covid-19 and attitudes towards a Covid-19 vaccine.

Design and participants In-depth phone interviews were carried out with 20 people from different ethnic groups and areas of Bradford during Autumn 2020. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted.

Results Participants spoke about a wide range of emotive misinformation they had encountered regarding Covid-19, resulting in confusion, distress and mistrust. Vaccine hesitancy could be attributed to three prominent factors: safety concerns, negative stories and personal knowledge. The more confused, distressed and mistrusting participants felt about their social worlds during the pandemic, the less positive they were about a vaccine.

Conclusions Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy needs to be understood in the context of the relationship between the spread of misinformation and associated emotional reactions. Vaccine programmes should provide a focused, localised and empathetic response to counter misinformation.

Patient or public contribution A rapid community and stakeholder engagement process was undertaken to identify Covid-19 related priority topics important to both Bradford citizens and local decision makers.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Clinical Protocols

https://wellcomeopenresearch.org/articles/5-191/v1

Funding Statement

This study was supported by the following research funding: The Health foundation Covid-19 Award (2301201). A Wellcome Trust infrastructure grant (WT101597MA). The National Institute for Health Research under its Applied Research Collaboration Yorkshire and Humber (NIHR200166). ActEarly UK Prevention Research Partnership Consortium (MR/S037527/1)

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

University of York ethical approval was secured in July 2020 (Ref: HSRGC/2020/400/G).

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Data Availability

The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions. Requests, to the corresponding author, for access to the data underpinning this paper will be considered and accommodated where reasonable.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted December 26, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Understanding Covid-19 misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in context: Findings from a qualitative study involving citizens in Bradford, UK
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Understanding Covid-19 misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in context: Findings from a qualitative study involving citizens in Bradford, UK
Bridget Lockyer, Shahid Islam, Aamnah Rahman, Josie Dickerson, Kate Pickett, Trevor Sheldon, John Wright, Rosemary McEachan, Laura Sheard
medRxiv 2020.12.22.20248259; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.22.20248259
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Understanding Covid-19 misinformation and vaccine hesitancy in context: Findings from a qualitative study involving citizens in Bradford, UK
Bridget Lockyer, Shahid Islam, Aamnah Rahman, Josie Dickerson, Kate Pickett, Trevor Sheldon, John Wright, Rosemary McEachan, Laura Sheard
medRxiv 2020.12.22.20248259; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.22.20248259

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (62)
  • Allergy and Immunology (142)
  • Anesthesia (47)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (416)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (70)
  • Dermatology (49)
  • Emergency Medicine (146)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (171)
  • Epidemiology (4875)
  • Forensic Medicine (3)
  • Gastroenterology (183)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (678)
  • Geriatric Medicine (70)
  • Health Economics (192)
  • Health Informatics (633)
  • Health Policy (322)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (208)
  • Hematology (85)
  • HIV/AIDS (156)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (5362)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (332)
  • Medical Education (94)
  • Medical Ethics (24)
  • Nephrology (75)
  • Neurology (690)
  • Nursing (42)
  • Nutrition (115)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (127)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (209)
  • Oncology (443)
  • Ophthalmology (140)
  • Orthopedics (36)
  • Otolaryngology (90)
  • Pain Medicine (35)
  • Palliative Medicine (17)
  • Pathology (130)
  • Pediatrics (196)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (131)
  • Primary Care Research (84)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (782)
  • Public and Global Health (1823)
  • Radiology and Imaging (325)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (138)
  • Respiratory Medicine (255)
  • Rheumatology (86)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (69)
  • Sports Medicine (62)
  • Surgery (102)
  • Toxicology (23)
  • Transplantation (29)
  • Urology (37)